Yeah and I agree with you and Voskuil that that's wrong and I support the "not not spv" assessment, unless of course there's some magic proof like what zerosync has for headers, but iirc no one has done it for tx validation yet. Relatively, headers are "easy".

I also am quite sure that assumeutxo is meant to be a temporary solution. It just bootstraps a state that could be correct, and then validates towards that. 

Without having a hash and a validation rule on the utxoset (like a utxo merkle mountain range commitment, much like the witness commitment) in each block, there is no way to do it in absolute safety - unless you made your own snapshot.

optimism

But in all those cases, there is a relationship of trust with the person providing the actual validation...and as you point out, they did do the validation.

I have nothing against an SPV node. It serves a purpose. I think my argument is with secsovereign claiming that something like AssumeUTXO has the same guarantees as a node that actual does validation.

bitcoin

An SPV refresher course brought to you by LLM slopsters

Scoresby

But in all those cases, there is a relationship of trust with the person providing the actual validation...and as you point out, they did do the validation. 

I have nothing against an SPV node. It serves a purpose. I think my argument is with secsovereign claiming that something like AssumeUTXO has the same guarantees as a node that actual does validation.